link to page 1 
Updated April 26, 2022
Navy DDG(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program:
Background and Issues for Congress
Introduction
DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues
The Navy’s DDG(X) program envisages procuring a class
for Congress, by Ronald O'Rourke.)
of next-generation guided-missile destroyers (DDGs) to
replace the Navy’s Ticonderoga (CG-47) class Aegis
LSC Industrial Base
cruisers and older Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class Aegis
All LSCs procured for the Navy since FY1985 have been
destroyers. The Navy wants to procure the first DDG(X) in
built at General Dynamics/Bath Iron Works (GD/BIW) of
FY2030. The Navy’s proposed FY2023 budget requests
Bath, ME, and Huntington Ingalls Industries/Ingalls
$195.5 million in research and development funding for the
Shipbuilding (HII/Ingalls) of Pascagoula, MS. Lockheed
program.
Martin and Raytheon are major contractors for Navy
surface ship combat system equipment. The surface
Navy Large Surface Combatants (LSCs)
combatant industrial base also includes hundreds of
additional component and material supplier firms.
Terminology
Since the 1980s, there has been substantial overlap in the
Figure 1. Navy Rendering of Notional DDG(X) Design
size and capability of Navy cruisers and destroyers. In part
for this reason, the Navy now refers to its cruisers and
destroyers collectively as large surface combatants (LSCs).
Force-Level Goal
The Navy’s current 355-ship force-level goal, released in
December 2016, calls for achieving and maintaining a force
of 104 LSCs. The Navy and the Office of the Secretary of
Defense (OSD) have been working since 2019 to develop a
successor to the 355-ship force-level goal. The Navy’s
FY2023 30-year (FY2023-FY2052) shipbuilding plan,
released on April 20, 2022, summarizes Navy and OSD
studies outlining potential successor Navy force-level goals
that include 63 to 96 LSCs.
Existing LSCs
Source: Il ustration accompanying Sam LaGrone, “Navy Unveils
Next-Generation DDG(X) Warship Concept with Hypersonic
The Navy’s CG-47s and DDG-51s are commonly called
Missiles, Lasers,” USNI News, January 12, 2022. The article credits the
Aegis cruisers and destroyers because they are equipped
il ustration to the U.S. Navy.
with the Aegis combat system, an integrated collection of
sensors and weapons named for the mythical shield that
DDG(X) Program
defended Zeus. The Navy procured 27 CG-47s between
FY1978 and FY1988. The ships entered service between
Program Designation
1983 and 1994. The first five, which were built to an earlier
In the program designation DDG(X), the X means the
technical standard, were judged by the Navy to be too
precise design for the ship has not yet been determined.
expensive to modernize and were removed from service in
2004-2005. Of the remaining 22 ships, the Navy’s FY2023
Procurement Date for Lead Ship
budget submission proposes retiring 5 in FY2023, another
As mentioned earlier, the Navy wants to procure the first
12 in FY2024-FY2027, and the final 5 in years after
DDG(X) in FY2030, though the date for procuring the first
FY2027.
ship has changed before and could change again.
Procurement of DDG-51s—the type of LSC currently being
The first DDG-51 was procured in FY1985 and entered
procured by the Navy—would end sometime after
service in 1991. The version of the DDG-51 that the Navy
procurement of DDG(X)s begins.
is currently procuring is called the Flight III version. The
Navy also has three Zumwalt (DDG-1000) class destroyers
Navy’s General Concept for the Ship
that were procured in FY2007-FY2009 and are equipped
Figure 1 shows a Navy rendering of a notional DDG(X)
with a combat system that is different than the Aegis
design concept. The Navy approved the DDG(X)’s top-
system. (For more on the DDG-51 and DDG-1000
level requirements (i.e., its major required features) in
programs, see CRS Report RL32109, Navy DDG-51 and
December 2020. Navy officials envision the DDG(X) as
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Navy DDG(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program: Background and Issues for Congress
being larger than the 9,700-ton Flight III DDG-51 design,
projects LSCs being procured in FY2030 and subsequent
but smaller than the 15,700-ton DDG-1000 design. A
years in annual quantities of one to three ships per year.
DDG(X) design midway in displacement between the
DDG-51 and DDG-1000 designs would displace about
Potential Unit Procurement Cost
12,700 tons, but the DDG(X)’s displacement could turn out
The first DDG(X) would be considerably more expensive to
to be less than or more than 12,700 tons.
procure than follow-on DDG(X)s because its procurement
cost would incorporate most or all of the detailed design
The Navy envisages the DDG(X) as having (1) an
and nonrecurring engineering (DD/NRE) costs for the class.
integrated propulsion system (IPS) that incorporates lessons
(It is a traditional Navy budgeting practice for the
from the DDG-1000 IPS and the Navy’s new Columbia-
procurement cost of the lead ship in a class to incorporate
class ballistic missile submarine; (2) initially, combat
most or all of the DD/NRE costs for the class.)
system equipment similar to that installed on the Flight III
DDG-51; and (3) more weapon capacity than the Flight III
In constant FY2019 dollars, the Navy wants the first
DDG-51. The Navy states that
DDG(X) to have a procurement cost of $3.5 billion to $4.0
The Future Naval Force Study (FNFS) and the
billion, and for the 10th ship in the class to have a
Future Surface Combatant Force Analysis of
procurement cost of $2.1 billion to $2.5 billion. An April
Alternatives
(FSCF
AoA)
identified
the
2021 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report estimates
requirement for future large surface combatants
the average procurement cost of the DDG(X) at $2.9 billion
(LSCs) to be capable of hosting directed energy
in constant FY2021 dollars. By way of comparison, the
(DE) weapons, larger missiles for increased range
Flight III DDG-51’s current procurement is about $2.0
and speed, increased magazine depth, growth in
billion.
organic sensors, and an efficient integrated power
Issues for Congress
system to manage the dynamic loads. DDG-51
Issues for Congress regarding the DDG(X) program include
Flight (FLT) III is highly capable, but after over 40
the following: (1) whether the Navy has accurately
years in production and 30 years of upgrades the
identified the DDG(X)’s required operational capabilities
hull form does not provide sufficient space and
and estimated procurement cost; (2) the DDG(X) program’s
center of gravity margin to host these future
potential total procurement quantity and annual
capabilities. To reset these design allowances for
procurement rate; (3) the number of shipbuilders to be used
the future of naval warfare, requirements trade-off
in building DDG(X)s; (4) the Navy’s plan for maturing new
and design studies were performed from FY 2018
technologies for the DDG(X); and (5) the Navy’s plan for
to FY 2020 that considered modification of existing
transitioning from DDG-51 procurement to DDG(X)
surface combatant and amphibious ships in addition
procurement, and the potential impact of that transition on
to new concepts. These studies concluded that a
shipbuilders and supplier firms. For further discussion of
new material solution via DDG(X) is required to
the final issue, see CRS Report RL32109, Navy DDG-51
deliver the necessary margins and flexibility to
and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and
succeed the DDG 51 Class as the next enduring
Issues for Congress, by Ronald O'Rourke.
LSC combining the DDG 51 FLT III combat system
elements with new hull form, an efficient Integrated
FY2023 Funding Request and
Power System (IPS) and greater endurance
Congressional Action
reducing the Fleet logistics burden. By including
The Navy’s proposed FY2023 budget requested $195.5
the DDG 51 FLT III combat system elements in the
million in research and development funding for the
DDG(X) baseline, Navy is taking an “evolutionary”
program, including $49.7 million in Project 0411 (DDG[X]
(vice
“revolutionary”)
approach
to
the
Concept Development) within Program Element (PE)
0603564N (Ship Preliminary Design & Feasibility Studies),
[DDG(X)]class, incorporating a critical lesson
which is line 47 in the Navy’s FY2023 research and
learned from the successful evolution of the DDG
development account, and $145.8 million for “DDG(X)
51 Class from [the Aegis cruiser design].
Power & Propulsion Risk Mitigation & Demonstration,”
(Source: Department of Defense Fiscal Year (FY)
which forms part of Project 2471 (Integrated Power
2023 Budget Estimates, Navy, Justification Book,
Systems [IPS]) within PE 0603573N (Advanced Surface
Volume 2 of 5, Research, Development, Test &
Machinery Systems), which is line 49 in the Navy’s
Evaluation, Navy, April 2022, p. 475.)
FY2023 research and development account.
Potential Procurement Quantities
Ronald O'Rourke, Specialist in Naval Affairs
The Navy has not specified how many DDG(X)s it wants to
IF11679
procure. The Navy’s FY2023 30-year shipbuilding plan
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Navy DDG(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program: Background and Issues for Congress
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11679 · VERSION 24 · UPDATED